Brexit

[Que]

I don't remember where and when I read the following, but I find it appropriate to the topic.

During the Napoleonic Wars, a French frigate engaged an English one. In the heat of the battle, the French captain tells the English one: You Englishmen fight for money but we Frenchmen fight for honour! --- To which the English captain retorts: Well, everyone fights for what they lack!

Funny. 

[Que]

Good points, well argued. But as always there are two sides. The British resentment of the French didn't suddenly fall out of a clear blue sky either. I do not know where your quotes come from but the consensus isn't "French are waging war on the UK" more they are being bloody difficult - border controls, vaccine imports and now fisheries. The resentment is clear to see

Absolutely. But I'm afraid that decades of EU bashing in British politics, in a toxic mix with anti-French and anti-German sentiments, have taken their toll. This is not easily undone. I wonder if the major political players in the UK that were involded even realise the damage that they have done, just for their own personal short term political gain. I doubt it.

As for Johnson, he is always at pains to stress "Our European friends" and I can give you many instances of him saying that.

He can say it as many times as he wants, it is totally disengenious. Unfortunately. And everybody knows it.
But that's OK. Friendships and alliances are built on mutual respect and trust. But business is business, and that is the current state of bilateral relations. More has been lost than most realise.

[Florestan]

Friendships and alliances are built on mutual respect and trust.

Really? Then why does The Netherlands staunchly oppose Romania's access to the Schengen Area?

[Que]

Really? Then why does The Netherlands staunchly oppose Romania's access to the Schengen Area?

No idea, I wasn't even aware...

But here's a wild guess: could it possibly have something to do with... corruption?   

Trust and blind faith are not the same.

[Florestan]

No idea, I wasn't even aware...

Of course you weren't. EU is Germany, France,  and The Netherlands first and foremost. 

But here's a wild guess: could it possibly have something to do with... corruption?   

Here's a wilder guess: could it possibly have something to do with illiberal democracy and authoritarianism? 

Heck, no way, as Hungary and Poland are full members of Schengen Area... 

Trust and blind faith are not the same.

There's a Romanian proverb: Mother for some, pest for others... 

[Que]

Here's a wilder guess: could it possibly have something to do with illiberal democracy and authoritarianism? 

There's a Romanian proverb: Mother for some, pest for others... 

The European Union is plagued by many serious problems...

But none of them were grounds for the UK to leave the EU.
It left the internal market, which the Brits designed themselves to cut down on red tape, to avoid... red tape...
But instead they got MORE red tape! Imposed on them by the EU! 

Huhh? 

[Florestan]

The European Union is plagued by many serious problems...

Say it again, please?

But none of them were grounds for the UK to leave the EU.

Bottom line, a majority of the UK people voted to leave the EU. Are you against democracy?

[The new erato]

I think Que could rephrase it as " but none of them were grounds for voters to vote for UK leaving the EU".

Of course, having gotten into the situation they were, there was no way of neglecting the outcome, though the various ways of leaving the EU were rather opaque.

[Que]

Say it again, please?

The European Union is plagued by many serious problems. Happy? 

Bottom line, a majority of the UK people voted to leave the EU. Are you against democracy?

Of course I was referring to the reasons for, or the arguments that inspired, the democratic decision to leave. Thank you, new erato.

[Papy Oli]

Good points, well argued. But as always there are two sides. The British resentment of the French didn't suddenly fall out of a clear blue sky either. I do not know where your quotes come from but the consensus isn't "French are waging war on the UK" more they are being bloody difficult - border controls, vaccine imports and now fisheries. The resentment is clear to see. As for Johnson, he is always at pains to stress "Our European friends" and I can give you many instances of him saying that.

To this post and priors:

From what I have read on the French side, that historical fishing request and licensing implemented by Jersey was brought up by them after and not as a part of the transition agreement that was agreed by all sides on fishing.

If that is indeed the case, it seems Jersey simply followed the path of moving the goal post when they suddenly read it or decided it was not actually suitable to them any more. I wonder who else did that before. Oh yes, that fellow who signed an agreement with his "European friends", voted for it, reneged it completely and blamed others in the process. That "mass of red tape" the EU implements now to the UK is, sadly, part of what was negotiated by the UK. Shouldn't it be taken up with whoever negotiated it, signed it and and had his mates to vote for it in the Parliament ?

As many statements that Prime minister can make (and their contrary depending where the wind has blown him over the years), they are not even worth the expensive donor-funded (allegedly) wallpaper roll it could be printed on.

Your mileage may vary of course.

Macron has made many mistakes of his own in the last few months too, I recognise that by the way.

As for the French/English thing, shortly, based on the Daily Mail headlines last week during that fishing kerfuffle or during the Brexit negotiations in the last 5 years, that particular, let's call it (important?) "fringe", could do well sometimes to learn to move on from that war worn-out "argument" or (at best) "banter".  The UK does the remembrance every year in the most perfect way for the fallen soldiers. It is a shame that those fritzes and frogs undertones are being rolled out at every opportunity by that particular press and some of their readers as it just undermines whichever remembrance they suddenly feel like embracing one week a year in their own flurry of patriotic poppies. 

Again, your perspective may vary. This is just mine, a Frenchman living nearly half his life in the UK, my home. A home I love but for which I am too at pains over the last 5 years.

[Que]

WWII has come up, and I think it is crucial in understanding the mindset that led to Brexit.

I guess you have to be part of the "defeated" nations in Europe to truly understand the importance of mutual reconciliation and cooperation, and putting its importance above anything else to achieve lasting peace and prosperity.

The UK has never been interested in participating in reconciliation. It deemed its wartime conduct to be beyond reproach and acted as a benevolent victor. Its attitude towards the rest of Europe has been purely instrumental: urging them to become friends, stop being a nuisance and form a shield against Soviet influence.

"Victorious" nations, empires, no matter how benevolent they are, do not put their self interest second to anyone else's. Not even to that of an alliance in which they play an import part. Only when the UK's empire went in decline and it became Europe's "sick man", it was prepared to eat humble pie and practically begged France to be admitted as a member of the European Community. It was only admitted when De Gaulle was out of the picture. You would think De Gaulle would have agreed to UK membership out of gratitude for its wartime effort, but he knew better... The UK never intended to become a team player.

EC/EU membership gave the UK the opportunity to reinvent itself as the transatlantic link between the superpower USA and Europe. The EC/EU was instrumental in bolstering the UK's economic strength by creating the internal market and in furthering the geopolitical agenda of the US by providing political stability in Europe and later by the expansion to the East.

But the influence of the US wained and European integration moved - by necessity - beyond that of just a "free market". Something had to give and national pride had to be swallowed....

But that proved to be a bridge too far for the national psyche of a people of victors, citizens of an empire.
And the rest is history, just as everything leading up to that moment.

[Irons]

I don't remember where and when I read the following, but I find it appropriate to the topic.

During the Napoleonic Wars, a French frigate engaged an English one. In the heat of the battle, the French captain tells the English one: You Englishmen fight for money but we Frenchmen fight for honour! --- To which the English captain retorts: Well, everyone fights for what they lack!

[Irons]

To this post and priors:

From what I have read on the French side, that historical fishing request and licensing implemented by Jersey was brought up by them after and not as a part of the transition agreement that was agreed by all sides on fishing.

If that is indeed the case, it seems Jersey simply followed the path of moving the goal post when they suddenly read it or decided it was not actually suitable to them any more. I wonder who else did that before. Oh yes, that fellow who signed an agreement with his "European friends", voted for it, reneged it completely and blamed others in the process. That "mass of red tape" the EU implements now to the UK is, sadly, part of what was negotiated by the UK. Shouldn't it be taken up with whoever negotiated it, signed it and and had his mates to vote for it in the Parliament ?

As many statements that Prime minister can make (and their contrary depending where the wind has blown him over the years), they are not even worth the expensive donor-funded (allegedly) wallpaper roll it could be printed on.

Your mileage may vary of course.

Macron has made many mistakes of his own in the last few months too, I recognise that by the way.

As for the French/English thing, shortly, based on the Daily Mail headlines last week during that fishing kerfuffle or during the Brexit negotiations in the last 5 years, that particular, let's call it (important?) "fringe", could do well sometimes to learn to move on from that war worn-out "argument" or (at best) "banter".  The UK does the remembrance every year in the most perfect way for the fallen soldiers. It is a shame that those fritzes and frogs undertones are being rolled out at every opportunity by that particular press and some of their readers as it just undermines whichever remembrance they suddenly feel like embracing one week a year in their own flurry of patriotic poppies. 

Again, your perspective may vary. This is just mine, a Frenchman living nearly half his life in the UK, my home. A home I love but for which I am too at pains over the last 5 years.

It must be difficult for you, Olivier. I would find it equally difficult to live in France - although I would love to - mind you not being able to speak, or more importantly read a word of French would be handy.

The wallpaper is with respect a cheap shot which didn't work out well for Starmer. Of course, I will not mention a certain Mr Sarkozy. 

[Irons]

WWII has come up, and I think it is crucial in understanding the mindset that led to Brexit.

I guess you have to be part of the "defeated" nations in Europe to truly understand the importance of mutual reconciliation and cooperation, and putting its importance above anything else to achieve lasting peace and prosperity.

The UK has never been interested in participating in reconciliation. It deemed its wartime conduct to be beyond reproach and acted as a benevolent victor. Its attitude towards the rest of Europe has been purely instrumental: urging them to become friends, stop being a nuisance and form a shield against Soviet influence.

"Victorious" nations, empires, no matter how benevolent they are, do not put their self interest second to anyone else's. Not even to that of an alliance in which they play an import part. Only when the UK's empire went in decline and it became Europe's "sick man", it was prepared to eat humble pie and practically begged France to be admitted as a member of the European Community. It was only admitted when De Gaulle was out of the picture. You would think De Gaulle would have agreed to UK membership out of gratitude for its wartime effort, but he knew better... The UK never intended to become a team player.

EC/EU membership gave the UK the opportunity to reinvent itself as the transatlantic link between the superpower USA and Europe. The EC/EU was instrumental in bolstering the UK's economic strength by creating the internal market and in furthering the geopolitical agenda of the US by providing political stability in Europe and later by the expansion to the East.

But the influence of the US wained and European integration moved - by necessity - beyond that of just a "free market". Something had to give and national pride had to be swallowed....

But that proved to be a bridge too far for the national psyche of a people of victors, citizens of an empire.
And the rest is history, just as everything leading up to that moment.

I agree with most of what you say. The UK does not fit and never has - De Gaulle was right. I am not so sure of your historical perspective, especially WW2. Faded Empire I do agree with. Frankly I believe it is much more simple, the UK is an island cut off from the continent of Europe - in more ways then one. 

[Papy Oli]

It must be difficult for you, Olivier. I would find it equally difficult to live in France - although I would love to - mind you not being able to speak, or more importantly read a word of French would be handy.

The wallpaper is with respect a cheap shot which didn't work out well for Starmer. Of course, I will not mention a certain Mr Sarkozy. 

At least Sarkozy has been and is being trialled for his offences 

Here, you can just pretend the ministerial code of conduct (which Boris signed too...  pattern, what pattern..  ) doesn't exist and carry on willy-nilly, ignore any accountability, and worse, win vote after vote. Turning a blind eye on what that wallpaper issue actually is and think it's ok is sadly part of the problem. The French would have probably worn yellow jackets in the street for less than that 
Here we just pile up praise on the bumbling fool 

[vandermolen]

WWII has come up, and I think it is crucial in understanding the mindset that led to Brexit.

I guess you have to be part of the "defeated" nations in Europe to truly understand the importance of mutual reconciliation and cooperation, and putting its importance above anything else to achieve lasting peace and prosperity.

The UK has never been interested in participating in reconciliation. It deemed its wartime conduct to be beyond reproach and acted as a benevolent victor. Its attitude towards the rest of Europe has been purely instrumental: urging them to become friends, stop being a nuisance and form a shield against Soviet influence.

"Victorious" nations, empires, no matter how benevolent they are, do not put their self interest second to anyone else's. Not even to that of an alliance in which they play an import part. Only when the UK's empire went in decline and it became Europe's "sick man", it was prepared to eat humble pie and practically begged France to be admitted as a member of the European Community. It was only admitted when De Gaulle was out of the picture. You would think De Gaulle would have agreed to UK membership out of gratitude for its wartime effort, but he knew better... The UK never intended to become a team player.

EC/EU membership gave the UK the opportunity to reinvent itself as the transatlantic link between the superpower USA and Europe. The EC/EU was instrumental in bolstering the UK's economic strength by creating the internal market and in furthering the geopolitical agenda of the US by providing political stability in Europe and later by the expansion to the East.

But the influence of the US wained and European integration moved - by necessity - beyond that of just a "free market". Something had to give and national pride had to be swallowed....

But that proved to be a bridge too far for the national psyche of a people of victors, citizens of an empire.
And the rest is history, just as everything leading up to that moment.

An interesting analysis but, I think, rather sweeping in places. I'm not sure that the UK had 'no intention' of becoming a team player or had no interest in reconciliation after WW2. After all, so much grain was poured into Germany after the war that bread rationing had to be introduced in the UK (bread had never been rationed in the war). Although, it can be argued, that the motivation was to prevent the spread of communism westwards, it nevertheless prevented 1000s of Germans from starving to death. I also suspect that De Gaulle's hostility to UK membership of the EEC/EU was as much to do with Britain's close relationship with the old Empire/Commonwealth countries and also De Gaulle's desire to control the EEC. The great achievement of the EEC was the rapprochement between France and Germany. Churchill himself said that he looked forward to 'a United States of Europe' in order to prevent another war breaking out. Britain should have joined the EEC in 1957 when she had the chance to do so.

[Madiel]

Bottom line, a majority of the UK people voted to leave the EU. Are you against democracy?

Personally, I'm against the variety of democracy that frightens Scottish people out of voting for independence by telling them that Scotland wouldn't be allowed into the EU as a separate nation, and then drags them out of the EU shortly afterwards against the wish of the Scottish people, and then tries to tell them they couldn't possibly have another independence referendum.

Then there's also the variety of democracy where the people of Northern Ireland voted to remain, because they understood what a colossal problem Brexit would be in Ireland, but got dragged out anyway.

There's a very genuine chance that "UK people" voting to leave the EU will be a key moment in there no longer being a UK.

[Madiel]

ADDENDUM: Then of course there's the minor detail that the fishing dispute has been around the Channel Islands. They didn't even get a vote on Brexit, not least because they weren't part of the EU in the first place.

[Florestan]

The European Union is plagued by many serious problems. Happy? 

Actually, what would make me happy is a EU less plagued by such problems. 

My point about Brexit is that motivated or not, reasonable or not, likeable or not, it is done. Dissecting its whys and hows over and over again is not going to undo it. The sooner EU and UK get over it and go their own ways (which may or may not cross), the better for both of them.

As for English pride, it's paralleled only by the French one. 

[Florestan]

There's a very genuine chance that "UK people" voting to leave the EU will be a key moment in there no longer being a UK.

There is, indeed.